Globe to Bostonians: It's not too late for you morons to do the right thing

When did Shirley Leung get on the Globe editorial board? The Editorial We at our Paper of Record wakes up from a long slumber and sighs and tut-tuts today that we lost the Olympics, but says it's not too late for us to learn from our stupid, pitiful yahoo mistake in turning our noses up at the Opportunity of a Lifetime:

The challenge now for Boston is to rekindle and redirect the civic energy that the Olympics bid unleashed. Sure, Boston 2024 stirred up discord. But the Olympics bid foundered prematurely, subsumed by early PR mistakes that allowed NIMBYism to take root. Yet the effort also touched off a much-needed civic dialogue about the city’s built environment and its transportation infrastructure.

Yes, because before the Olympics, we never once considered what a soulless collection of squat glass towers the Seaport is becoming or pondered just how bad our transportation infrastructure is. And we certainly didn't have anybody thinking about ways to make the city better.

However Adam manages to keep Universal Hub a place of such cordial discourse; is an amazing feat of skill, and I'm sure a lot of endless work!

There's simply no other place on the Internet where people with wide-ranging viewpoints engage with one another, without the thread descending into useless unpleasantries.

A real exchange of ideas, and thoughtful conversation takes place here. We can simultaneously have wildly opposing opinions about some things, while realizing we're in total agreement about other things.

The Globe is a joke and most Bostonians I know stopped reading it. The most prominent articles on their website are about tom brady taking a dump or a recap of argument between a sox player and a broadcaster.

Let me repeat that: The most prominent story on their website is about an argument between two grown men over a baseball game.

Call everyone morons and then ask them to buy into a pier park idea. Brilliant! Leung needs to cool the jets. The pier park is DOA. Alex Krieger is a great academic, but not a great professional. The traffic forecasts alone would kill the Krieger-Leung's fantasy pier. Has she not seen the Krieger botch jobs in and around Boston City Plaza? Has she ever been to Dallas? Leung needs to take a vaca, a loooong vaca

Krieger misses a lot of items. Go into the new Government Ctr glass cube and look around. The idea is great; until the harbor water floods into the pier pools. Or, just visit Dallas and ask about the Trinity Parkway

Question: How can she not have been canned? Answer: From the start, she was an instrument of an agenda from the top.

Somehow we thought that there might not be a gross conflict of interest, despite things like Yawkey Way and the corporate brand promotion, and despite very wealthy businessmen rubbing elbows in old boys clubs.

I'm calling time of death: they still have genuine journalists on staff, but the Globe is doomed. Someone fund a foundation and hire away the best remaining talent.

an Olympics and found themselves saddled afterward with hundreds of millions to billions in public debt and expensive, crumbling white elephants of buildings useful to nobody.

For once, Boston's citizenry managed to stand up to the tiny handful of monied interests that would have profited from this egregiously stupid boondoggle at the expense of everyone else, and told them to eff off: this is our effing city.

Bully for us, and another hearty Eff Off! to the Globe for continuing to prop up the corpse of this roundly debunked myth.

LA might actually be able to turn a slim profit by using existing venues. That still doesn't mean Boston would have been able to do the same.

As for me, someone finding a way to make money off it still wouldn't make up for cutting down mature irreplaceable trees on the Common and filling it with sand for beach freaking volleyball. And the mayor signing away the first amendment rights of public employees without even reading the contract first. Hard pass thank you.

This is the kind of tone deaf attempting to crap down your throat berating that results in people like Trump and maybe even Tito getting elected as a F---- You!11 from the electorate to 'their betters' in the political establishment, newsrooms, and country club/dinner party circuit.

Yeah... I'm no great fan of Tito's but then I think about pulling the lever for Marty, who made it very clear how he feels about me and most of the city by calling us "six people on Twitter" and I just can't do that either. Whoever is Marty's closest opponent will get my vote, and I will worry about voting against the new clown later.

I'm not on Twitter, I've certainly never gotten embroiled in Olympics drama there, pro- or anti-, yet Mahty thinks he has me all figured out and I don't matter based on my feelings on a single issue.

There's no point voting for someone who explicitly says he does not and will never listen to your concerns.

Next summer Olympics up for grabs is in 2032, and the hustle will begin what, 6 years from now?

That gives us six years to plan and pay for substantial public transportation upgrades in the city. If we can, in six years, dramatically improve subway, streetcar, bus, and commuter rail service... yeah, folks will sign on.

Seriously, NIMBY ?? How dare you, Shirley. That is so, so condescending and wrong. I guess I should not be shocked but I am. I shouldn't be so angry but I am. It shows Shirley truly does not understand that cities are supposed to support residents, not be a bragging point to the world or other cities. That's the only thing she can mean when she says World Class.
. NIMBY is when neighborhoods (usually upper and middle class) don't want a landfill or public housing or mental health or juvenile group homes near them, but are ok with those going to other neighborhoods (usually poorer and with less political clout).
It is not NIMBY for Boston residents, of all classes, to be against massive public spending on a private enterprise, taking money from Boston public services and displacing people and businesses.
. Was Shirley on the take from the IOC or Fish? It is truly bizarre that anyone who understands that the city has to pick up the tab for overruns could even consider the Olympics unless her interests aligned with those getting the profits rather than people who live here. Did she defend the Big Dig overruns also? I forget what she wrote on that subject.
. And it is not just 'rabid' people on U Hub. Across the city in other forums people care deeply about what is good for Boston and Boston residents and that is why the Olympics were defeated. Also of course, holding the bid in secret didn't help, but even if their PR had not been bad, it would just have given us more time to defeat it earlier.
Grr.

I got carried away since Shirley has been at the forefront but it's worse the Globe is taking this view. Look at this.Where are their priorities? Strut our stuff?? How OLD are you people? Get a life. We have a good city, I don't need to hobnob with other leaders and brag.
Don't worry, Globe, we all came together due to the Olympics AND we don't need them.

Transformative power of sports????? What planet are you on? When the IOC is a public transparent group run by the UN, then maybe. They should just be in Greece forever and stop stealing from countries (see link above about Brazil).
"The IOC turning towards Western Democracies.".. that isn't a red flag about how the IOC operates??
Arg.

"The fanfare this week around the selection of Los Angeles as host of the 2028 Summer Olympics provides a taste of what Boston lost when it abandoned its bid for the Games in 2015. .. As a chance for a city to strut before a world audience, the Olympic Games have no parallel. ... The opportunity to .. reintroduce the nation’s oldest big city as the educational and research powerhouse it has become,... The proposal for a walkable Olympics would have left an enduring imprint on the city’s physical form, and held out the promise of bringing together disparate and sometimes fractious communities and neighborhoods through the transformative power of sports. .... a positive turn for the IOC, a signal that it wants to win back the favor of Western democracies. "

Whenever someone tells me that "Boston will never be a world class city" because we are the type of people who refused the Olympics I ask them to take a look at the list of Olympic cities in the modern era (let's say 1960) and tell me which cities were not "World Class" before they hosted the Olympics but had their status boosted to that level by hosting the games. It's a completely hollow argument.

Yes, because before the Olympics, we never once considered what a soulless collection of squat glass towers the Seaport is becoming or pondered just how bad our transportation infrastructure is. And we certainly didn't have anybody thinking about ways to make the city bette

For the squat glass towers - are you talking about the ones near 225 Seaport Blvd? Or maybe 126 Congress St? Or even 606 Congress St? Oh, and let's not forget the IDC Building. Yeah, that's squatty, but it's been there since 1918, so I say give it a pass.

OK, 250 Northern Ave is squatty and has glass. So is 601 Congress, but that's been there for, like, Ever, originally as the Manulife building but now John Hancock. In fact it's not just one level of glass, it's TWO! (Plus add'l reading HERE)

I get it, it doesn't have the small, old-world feel other parts of the city have. But I say that's OK, it's how cities grow and change. It's quite possible the streets of the Seaport will get smaller, or maybe become more boulevard-like with greater center planted islands. And the other undeveloped plots of land may not be as glass-walled as those that sit closer to the city-proper and the channel. Patience.

It's not just that Boston can't afford it: no city can afford what the modern summer Olympics do, to the budget and the infrastructure. This is one where Boston and New York (another city where the mayor wanted it and the people didn't) are either smarter than Los Angeles, or better at blocking this sort of expensive crap.

Games (both summer and winter) to once and for all be located at PERMANENT venues instead of this charade of choosing a host city every four years through the current wasteful, expensive, and (IMO) idiotic extortion festival selection process.

It's truly unfortunate that the IOC, and their sub-organizations like the USOC, are far more interested in trying to convince cites that hosting the Olympics will be the salvation for their local economy then in waking up and realizing that providing permanent venues for the Games is the only realistic means to insure that the Games will be able to survive in the long term.

And, NO city needs to construct the largest McDonald's restaurant in the chain, which is apparently a condition the IOC agreed to in order to get McD's to sponsor the Games.

LA's hosted before and so actually has enough facilities built for this not to be an insane idea. I have heard other suggest that there ought to be permanent (or permanent set of) locations for the winter and summer games respectively, and that seems like a great idea. The sooner we can starve the parasitic IOC members and focus on what the games are supposed to represent, the better.

I take offense to the condescending, unfounded suggestion that the Olympic bid in Boston fell to NIMBYism, as if the Globe Editorial Board exists at a higher altitude than Bostonians. First off, it's laughable to suggest Boston2024 identified the potential of Widett Circle, Dorchester Avenue and the Fort Point Channel. In the trenches, anyone following development ten years ago (with the exception of the Globe editiorial board) saw the Red Line was heating up past Broadway down to Andrew Square. The US Postal Service's Dot Ave acres were master planned 10 years ago for 12 million square feet of future projects and the Fort Point Channel Watersheet Activation Plan terminating at Widett Circle dates back to 2002.
The Globe Editorial Board and a few columnists have a habit of routinely hammering so-called "NIMBYs" to suggest Bostonians don't take that long view. In fact, it's the Globe opinion makers who have been near-completely AWOL

And it's the top comment on the globe. Not sure how he got ahead of the other commenters with that!

Full text, at least as can be pasted on a phone.

While I'm on board with moving Boston forward with visionary ideals, I take offense to the condescending, unfounded suggestion that the Olympic bid in Boston fell to NIMBYism, as if the Globe Editorial Board exists at a higher altitude than Bostonians. First off, it's laughable to suggest Boston2024 identified the potential of Widett Circle, Dorchester Avenue and the Fort Point Channel. In the trenches, anyone following development ten years ago (with the exception of the Globe editiorial board) saw the Red Line was heating up past Broadway down to Andrew Square. The US Postal Service's Dot Ave acres were master planned 10 years ago for 12 million square feet of future projects and the Fort Point Channel Watersheet Activation Plan terminating at Widett Circle dates back to 2002.The Globe Editorial Board and a few columnists have a habit of routinely hammering so-called "NIMBYs" to suggest Bostonians don't take that long view. In fact, it's the Globe opinion makers who have been near-completely AWOL in the trenches of city planning, absent on the ground when it matters. A recent story by the Globe's terrific real estate reporter Jon Chesto highlighted how a deficit in public transit options in South Boston is now hamstringing developers. But where were Globe opinion makers when the South Boston waterfront's Transportation Plan was being drafted in 15 months of meetings between 2013 and 2015? Find an editorial or column... Globe editorialists were missing in action. The SBW Transportation Plan focused on car-centric solutions, largely pet projects of MCCA and Massport, with bus rapid transit (BRT) and bike accommodation as a footnote. It's more convenient today for Globe columnists to paratroop into City Point today and blame NIMBYism for opposition to development, rather than to have engaged, assessed and understood evolving, legitimate concerns about traffic and transit as the neighborhood took on an unprecedented amount of new density.Largely without media attention, I and my neighbors attended sixty (60) BPDA-hosted public meetings planning and rezoning our Fort Point neighborhood to ensure Boston's waterfront would evolve as a densely populated, mixed-use urban neighborhood. Yet it was nearly impossible to draw the Boston's Globe editorial board's attention to the long-term impacts of Boston2024's proposed "key venue" in the heart of Fort Point, a sprawling, one million square feet media center, longer than the Olympic stadium. The Media Center was proposed as a permanent "legacy asset," one that would eliminate over a thousand housing units that we had planned on USPS acres. While it's easy to blame NIMBYs today, the reality is the Globe failed to understand impacts, and failed to mention (including in the editorial above) that USPS never provided permission to use its acres.The Globe was hammering "NIMBYs" when citizens in the trenches were raising concern that post-2024 development rights were being ceded to Boston2024 investors, rights valued at upwards of $5 billion for a $1 billion investment in decking. Citizens being pegged as "NIMBYs" by the Globe were raising issues regarding Boston2024's failure to identify a number of sites for key venues. So-called "NIMBYs" cited Boston2024's failure to plan "Midtown" for anything but commercial uses. Again, on the ground when residents were participating in planning the city's trajectory, Globe opinion makers were nowhere to be found. So spare me the visionary talk, editorial board. We've been in the trenches working on long-term trajectories and it's been a lonely exercise. My Seaport zip code is bereft of civic facilities, cultural use planning and our long-planned greenspace network is on life support, while the Globe EB and columnists are busy setting up non-existent NIMBYs as strawmen, often just to hammer single, spot zoned one-off projects through approvals.

The powers that be at the Globe see the Olympics as a great way to get the taxpayers to spend much more money than they otherwise would - no surprise there. Never mind that the buildings they put up in Athens now look like ancient ruins, ready to collapse from lack of maintenance or use. It would be so much easier to just pile up money and burn it - the effect would be the same in far less time.

I great majority is expressing negatively to the Olympics. And with good reason. It was a terrible plan. Now that we see how this have unfolded, we can speculate an Alternative History (Future History?). If Boston stayed in, we can imagine that we could be offered the same plan as LA. Paris would have 2024. Boston would get 2028 - to our displeasure as even though we have gain 4 extra years, it just mean a more drawn out train wreck. The most notable thing the insane Widett Circle platforming plan becomes kinda more viable with the additional time to deck over - but still overwhelming expensive even without factoring our likelihood of going over-budget.

Likely, the Olympics would have been pulled off. MBTA and infrastructure would still suck. But avoided embarrassment because our lucky timing of new trains and doing just enough avoid being visible for 2 weeks to look functional for that duration. For that 2 weeks of fake functionality and huge expense of Widett decking, we would be living with a Montreal-style Hangover for decades.

But all that said, I will express again that the Olympics did had to be this way. A successful and profitable Boston Olympics was possible. That such a bid should have leveraged the dormitories and sports facilities of the Universities. It should have some land like Beacon Park Train Yard for a stadium. A bid that maximizes excuses for our own benefits to accelerating improvements and and minimizes costs to ourselves. And if they don't want to do that, that's fine.

But nope, the plan was horrible - designed with no cooperation or leverage with available resources, designed at maximum cost to ourselves to execute. The bid failing was the best scenario.

I strongly suggest the book "No Boston Olympics: How And Why Smart Cities Are Passing On The Torch" by Chris Dempsey and Andrew Zimablist. It clearly points out what an absurd farce this entire Boston 2024 thing was. It's a good read and holds the interest. And no, I'm a shill for the book. I took it out of the library. I had to wait on a list for it, so I guess a lot of people are interested.

I avidly read the Globe in the 70s, 80s and beyond. The quality of journalism was much higher than it is now. When did they start hiring out of touch writers in a bubble like Shirley Leung and the like? It's been a long, slow decline.

it's still not a good idea to have the Olympics come here to Boston. Boston is way too congested, and it's public transportation system is already overtaxed, at least in part because the politicians in the state, namely the governors, have never, never gotten around to fixing the problem.